Hall of fame

[Inseriousity.]

lol youve just contradicted yourself there. you said fame is subjective then said they're working on a wrongly defined meaning of fame. Maybe their definition of fame is just different to yours as fame is subjective?

Names aside as I haven't really looked at it properly, I do agree with you. I think each individual should have at least 2-3 achievements next to their name to prove that they've earned their place on that page.

[GommeInc]

lol youve just contradicted yourself there. you said fame is subjective then said they're working on a wrongly defined meaning of fame. Maybe their definition of fame is just different to yours as fame is subjective?

Names aside as I haven't really looked at it properly, I do agree with you. I think each individual should have at least 2-3 achievements next to their name to prove that they've earned their place on that page.

How is that a contradiction? Their definition of fame is anyone can be famous as long as they work for us - based upon fact (objective) than widespread opinion (subjective). That's not fame, that's being a volunteer on a fansite Fame is widely accepted as being:

The condition of being known or talked about by many people, esp. on account of notable achievements.

The majority in the list are only famous for being staff, the description of them even hints this. There is no sense of individual achievement in the Hall of Fame. If they want to list their staff, then make a new page and leave the Hall of Fame for people who are actually famous for being themselves and for what they did, rather than for what they were in Habbox. Their defintion seems more objective (factual - x was a GM) than subjective (wide spread opinion - x was a great GM who did ...).

[Chippiewill]

So rename hall of fame to notable staff and then make a hall of fame?

[GommeInc]

So rename hall of fame to notable staff and then make a hall of fame?

Indeed, that would be the wiser option.

[buttons]

i'm confused, what's the point on two seperate hall of fames? what exactly can you be famous for on this site/forum other than for being staff lol

[RyRy]

i'm confused, what's the point on two seperate hall of fames? what exactly can you be famous for on this site/forum other than for being staff lol

Tbh I was gonna bring up that very idea, but I've got the answer you're looking for Jen. There isn't any point, the people who go on here do it leisurely and the staff that come on here do a job. Plus nobody outside of the community gives a hoot who's popular and who's not, if anything it's alienating.

[Catzsy]

A Hall of Fame are for people who have made a significient/special contribution to whatever sphere they are in not because are 'famous' as such as far I know such as the music industry etc. We seem to be going off the original definition where people who in the past did. They many not visit the forum now but I don't see that as a reason for them not to be included as they were in the past. No point rewriting history here just because not many members remember them now. I think one hall of fame is fine and should include staff and members alike.

[GommeInc]

A Hall of Fame are for people who have made a significient/special contribution to whatever sphere they are in not because are 'famous' as such as far I know such as the music industry etc.

So the majority of the current "Hall of Fame" (a.k.a. past and present managers) shouldn't be there then? They've not made any special/significant contributions, they were just managers who worked for Habbox - hardly fame and awe inspiring. Again, let the members decide. I don't get why management are again deciding what and who is famous.

Also, your definition of fame is very supervisual. Fame can come and go, there's no point adding people no-one particularly remembers. Ever heard people say "they were famous in their time" in a sentence? It's exactly the same here.

Seriously, the definition you lot are going by is lousy. If you were in charge of compiling a list of influential, important and notable Kings and Queens, you would put them all in the list, for the simple fact they were royalty, rather than any measurable amount of significance.

The proof is in the pudding anyway, you can tell who is famous in the current list by the biography that accompanies the individual. The ones with a generic "they were a general manager and made substantial contributions" are the ones who aren't famous, for the simple fact that the description used means sweet naf all

[nvrspk4]

I kind of skipped over the majority of the 9 pages and read like 2...what happened to the old page Alkaz did? It was very well researched and was completed with the assistance of many of the members of the Ex-Staff forum, most notably MissAlice who did a lot of work on the project. I understand that it was considered too inclusive, but it would be very useful as a research source for the new HoF since the new one (no offense) isn't that well-researched, mostly because only a handful of staff reach back before the 8F8 days.

[Chippiewill]

Perhaps a well seasoned ex-staff member like yourself would prove of valuable assistance in assembling said list?